Opinion

My salute to a Liberal who is hearing our Indigenous voice

By Rachel Perkins

July 25, 2019 — 12.00am

What’s the purpose of government? Recently, I heard the former chief justice of Australia, Murray Gleeson, give a speech in which he observed, “For many, government should concern itself with material and economic matters, not contestable ethical issues.”

When justifying recognition of Indigenous people in the constitution to people who understand government in this way, Gleeson said we need only quote one sentence from the High Court’s decision in Mabo: “Their dispossession underwrote the development of the nation.”

Director, producer, and screenwriter Rachel Perkins.

Expanding on this one sentence, Gleeson said, “If it were fair to regard Indigenous people as merely one of the many minority groups that can be identified in the complex pattern of our social structure – and a very small group at that – then it would be reasonable to leave them to make their own way as contesting participants in the ordinary democratic process. But that would take dispossession to its logical, and unattractive, conclusion.”

The unattractiveness of such a conclusion seems to have dawned on Liberals such as the recently elected Senator Andrew Bragg.

Advertisement

I was in the chamber on Wednesday when Bragg used his first speech to the Senate to tell us his understanding of the purpose of government. He spoke of Menzies’ liberalism, of markets and enterprise, taxation, foreign investment, superannuation, fairness, and, finally, national recognition.

Loading

In doing so, he demonstrated that Liberals regard hearing Aboriginal voices as part of the purpose of government. He understands what we meant when we said in the Uluru Statement from the Heart, “we seek constitutional reforms to empower our people and take a rightful place in our own country”.

As he said in his speech, the statement “imagines a constitution where Indigenous Australians are guaranteed a say on laws made under the races and territories powers which affect them”.

Like Bragg, I too “want all Australians to be proud of our great nation”. He is right that we should strive to ensure that “all Australians will always be equal”.

I salute him for understanding, however, that to share in this pride and equality, Indigenous people desperately need to ensure that our children do not “feel estranged in the land of their ancestors”.

Like my father, Charlie Perkins, and generations of Indigenous activists, I continue to pursue recognition of the dispossession of our ancestors and justice for their descendants. I have had to come to understand that, although constitutional recognition is vital for overcoming this sense of estrangement that continues to be experienced by the descendants of Australia’s dispossessed peoples, we need to be pragmatic about how we achieve this.

Family bonds: Charles Perkins with his children, Rachel and Adam, at the Aboriginal tent embassy in Canberra in 1974.Credit:The Sydney Morning Herald

If Bragg’s speech demonstrates that Liberals are finally hearing how Aboriginal people feel, his speech also sends a warning to us. He reminds us that we cannot have constitutional recognition on any terms. He reminds us that any proposal will have to respect the supremacy of Parliament and the equality of all Australians.

As Murray Gleeson pointed out in his recent speech, “It is unlikely that Parliament will propose a change to the constitution in aid of Indigenous recognition if the effect of the change will be to curtail its own legislative power.”

He went on to acknowledge that we well understand this. So now it’s over to Bragg and his colleagues to work with us to ensure that we uphold the constitution and recognise Indigenous peoples.

Loading

Ken Wyatt, the minister for Indigenous Australians, has committed to holding a referendum within three years if we can find a compromise position that has a reasonable prospect of success.

The Prime Minister has said he is committed to ensuring that we have structures for ensuring that all levels of government hear Indigenous voices. He has also said that we should proceed to constitutional recognition.

He is right about both of these things. So now we need to find a compromise that enables this. We need to find a way through which constitutional recognition can provide a guarantee that the government and the Parliament are obliged by the constitution to hear these voices which also preserves the existing constitutional arrangements.

Let it be the legacy of Scott Morrison and his government that, within three years, the constitution will recognise that, because the dispossession of Indigenous peoples underwrote the development of our great nation, our founding document must impose upon our Parliament an obligation to ensure the voices of our Indigenous peoples are heard.

Rachel Perkins is managing director of Blackfella Films and a director of Uphold & Recognise, a non-profit organisation committed to upholding the constitution and recognising Indigenous Australians.